Skip to main contentAccessibility feedback

Friendly Fire

Friendly Fire

I really liked your magazine when you responded to the various Protestant forms of religion. Lately, however, I notice more and more disputes with Catholics who don’t meet your criterion of Catholicism. God knows this Church has enough problems without fighting among ourselves. 

Fr. William Mooney 
St. Michael’s Church
Poway, California 


 

Relieved There’s No ‘Co-Redemptrix’ Dogma

 

I thoroughly enjoyed the article in the October issue (received, as usual, after Thanksgiving) concerning “Walking The Ecumenical Tightrope” by Philip Glosser. I was especially interested in the problem Mary becomes to Protestants. It has been my personal experience that she is a problem with many Catholics as well.

The title of “Co-Redemptrix” is a particular problem in this day and age. Women who are fighting for the ordination of women in the Church are using the phrase to understand that Mary has an equal part in salvation history as her son. They extrapolate from this that, since Mary is an equal in salvation, women, as “equals” to men in the Church, should be ordained as priests, bishops, etc.

Of course, the true meaning of “Co-Redemptrix” does not make Mary equal to Jesus. However, the ignorance of the people at large in the language of the Church makes it easy for feminists to fool people into the wrong belief. It is for this reason that I’m relieved that the Pope has not proclaimed the title of Co-Redemptrix” as dogma. It could cause far more confusion and turmoil than there already is. 

Phillip R. Mathes 
Dayton, Ohio 


 

Search Engine Finds Our ‘Anti-Catholic Whoppers’ Tract

 

I was happy to find your web page. I entered the key word “Whopper Jr.” and got you. I am a practicing Catholic. I hope you keep up the good work. 

Elaine Tuzzolino 
Via the Internet 


 

Culpa Noster

 

I recently gave a lesson on the authority of the Catholic Church to our local RCIA program. I received a lot of compliments after the class. Everyone was asking me a lot of questions on a lot of different topics. They wanted to know how I obtained all this knowledge about the Catholic Church. I told them it was the fault of Catholic Answers and the magazine they publish called This Rock. Thanks again for proclaiming the faith. 

Louie Parre 
Spring Hill, Kansas 


 

Hand-Holding: A Priest’s Reaction

 

It was interesting to note that in all the letters you received defending the holding of hands at the Our Father (in response to “Why I Don’t Hold Hands at Mass,” July–August) there was not a single response from a priest. They are the ones responsible for permitting the practice. As guardians of the liturgy priests should not be introducing or encouraging practices that are not approved. They do not have the authority to do so, and certainly the laity does not. This generation of priests fears to say anything to the congregation that might offend anyone. They call it being “pastoral.”

I have been attempting to research where the practice of holding hands began and who started it. Some put the blame on the Cursillo movement and others on the charismatics. No one, however, seems to want to take responsibility. Whether we are speaking of its vertical or horizontal dimensions, the fact is that the practice is not liturgical. It is found neither in the black nor the red ink of approved texts. For that reason alone it is a liturgical abuse. It is beyond my understanding why the Vatican congregation in charge of such matters is so reluctant to give a definitive response to inquiries concerning the practice and its rapid spread.

To the celebrant both the holding of hands and the sign of peace come at the worst possible time and are totally distracting. Surely we do not need two consecutive signs expressing the same thing. We should decide on one or the other. Whichever is chosen it should be moved to a more appropriate place in the liturgy, perhaps immediately following the prayers of intercession. 

Fr. Eckley Macklin, S.O.L.T. 
Corpus Christi, Texas 


 

I Was Another Teenage Convert

 

I read the article “I Was A Teenage Convert” in the November 1998 issue of This Rock with particular satisfaction. Only this previous Easter was I received into the bosom and unity of Holy Mother Church at the ripe age of sixteen. 

It is so uplifting to learn of such individuals as Jeffrey Johnson with similar experiences and struggles as myself. To become Catholic is to enter into an entirely other realm, quite dissimilar to what one has been accustomed to, and yet to find one’s home.

To be Catholic is to live a paradox. To believe that the Body and Blood of Christ can exist under the elements of bread and wine and to believe that the waters of baptism actually regenerate the soul seems to be a contradiction to what we see with our human eyes. 

Yet it is these mysteries, these perceived contradictions, that unite us with God, who came to us under the auspices of the Incarnation. 

Christopher Bennett 
Harriman, Tennessee 


 

Listen to Them All!

 

I am a twenty-four-year-old Catholic seminarian studying at St. John’s Seminary in Boston, and I wish to express my gratitude for your magazine. In this age of lax morals and wishy-washy faith, it is a pleasure to read This Rock, solid in its theology and love for the one true Church and faithfulness to the magisterium. The articles often help me to better understand and defend the teachings of the Church and bring me to a greater love for the faith.

Each month I look forward to receiving my copy and read it quickly and fully. My one concern—and it is extremely minor—is that my issue always arrives one month late. The October 1998 issue, for example, was received on November 20. Granted, lateness in no way detracts from the timeless issues discussed and the teachings presented by This Rock, but without a current schedule for the radio show I am not able to plan what shows to tune in. Of course, your answer would be “Listen to them all!’ But, alas, homework prevents this. If you can, please resolve this problem (the time problem, not the homework) so that I can enjoy both This Rock and the radio shows.

Enclosed please find a check for one year’s subscription. I have read that free subscriptions are given to prisons and, as my own subscription is a gift, I would like to give one year of such powerful Catholic teaching to someone in prison. Please use this money for that purpose.

Again, thank you for publishing such a wonderful magazine. This Rock has made me a stronger and more knowledgeable Catholic and has strengthened my love for the Church. 

Edelmiro Martinez III 
Boston, Massachusetts 

Editor’s reply: The bugaboo of tardiness that has haunted us for the last year or so will soon be banished: All subscribers should receive the March 1999 issue by the first—of March, that is. 


 

Like This Rock, Go to Hell 

 

I noticed some letters regarding Vince Lewis and All Roads Ministry, and I too had an experience with him. Several months ago I wrote him regarding his apologetics course. I did not ask for anything free, just for information. I received a letter back from him attacking inmates and making comments such as “I suppose you are in prison with no money or family and want something free” and “Most prison inmates are on their way to hell and too lazy to do anything about it” and “Don’t whine but be a man if you still are one.” Well, needless to say, I had never received a letter like this before. He said to write to This Rock and upon receiving a copy write him back with my comments about the magazine, and he would decide if I was worthy of his help. I did just that and wrote him a three-page reply giving him my thoughts about This Rock. (My comments were all positive.) 

When he received my letter, he replied back that since I liked This Rock I did not deserve his help and that if I did not wake up I would go to hell. 

After I recovered my composure I went to my room, sat down, prayed for Vince Lewis, and then forgot the matter. Until I saw the letters in your recent issue.

I just want to let you know that I enjoy This Rock and share it with the other Catholic inmates here. I feel that This Rock is solidly with the Church and the Holy Father. 

Gary McClard 
Western Reception Diagnostic Correctional Center
St. Joseph, Missouri 


 

And Now, the Endearing Mr. Lewis Himself:

 

In a recent issue two letter writers criticized me and my handling of a request by a con for free material. Rather than defend myself let me follow my normal policy and attack my critics in an ad hominem way. 

To “Cathy” I reply: There is a reason why God—and I—require females to shut up about religious matters and refrain from criticizing men. Views like yours are the reason behind that reason.

And to “Russell” I reply: Read my reply to Cathy.

Thank you for this opportunity to straighten out at least two of your readers. 

Vin Lewis 
Hopewell Junction, New York 


 

In Favor of Immediate Consumption 

 

The article “How to Receive the Eucharist” by Father Parcher in the November [1997] issue left me somewhat confused. Confused because in an earlier issue of This Rock it was stated that the proper way to receive Communion in the hand was to consume the host in front of the distributor. It takes only a second. Father Parcher, however, states that the receiver should step aside and then consume the host.

Inasmuch as I have found a host floating in holy water at the church door (which I understand from our deacon is not uncommon—hosts are found in the pages of hymnals and missals as well as under kneelers), I am in favor of immediate consumption. I admit worshipers look very holy when they step aside and consume the host rather than rushing off with it. Perhaps it really makes no difference since we will never be instructed from the pulpit. I for one would like the clergy to make up its mind.

I would like to read some discussion about the vast number of churchgoers receiving Communion. Are all these people in a state of grace? Do most people receive because everyone else does? Those who in conscience do not receive would be conspicuous because of their presumed “sins.” No wonder polls show that a many Catholics think the host is a symbol and not the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. 

Florence J. Meyer 
Cincinnati, Ohio 


 

Monks Need Altars

 

The Benedictine monks of the Abbey of Fontgombault in the Archdiocese of Bourges in France are coming to the United States next year to establish a new monastery in Oklahoma, at the invitation of Bishop Edward Slattery of Tulsa. Dom Bethel, a monk who grew up in Wichita, Kansas, has written to me asking for help in locating portable wooden altars for their chapel. With the permission of the Holy See and of their local bishop, the monks of Fontgombault offer Mass in the traditional Roman or Tridentine rite. The monks who are priests do not concelebrate the conventual Mass; rather, each monk offers a private Mass after Lauds in the morning. So the new monastery will need side altars, about twelve of them to start off.

You may know of religious houses or churches or monasteries in this country or Canada with such altars that are no longer used. Of course, many such altars are stone and not transportable, but some are wooden and could be shipped.

The new Oklahoma monastery, to be called Annunciation Priory of Clear Creek, will open in September 1999. If anyone knows of such altars that are no longer in use and perhaps for sale, please contact me by email at kjkramer@rogersu.edu or by regular mail at 814 23rd Avenue S.W., Miami, Oklahoma 74354. 

Kirk Kramer 
Miami, Oklahoma 


 

Consumed by Pillar of Fire

 

In June of this year, I was searching the Internet for the phrase “pillar of fire” because there is a denomination called Pillar of Fire—an offshoot of Methodism—and I was searching to see if the denomination had a website that contained a statement of beliefs, history, etc. What I came across was your tract, Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth. As a result, after a five-month period of intense study, reflection, and Mass attendance, I have come back to the Catholic faith.

I was raised Catholic, but not in a family that always went to Mass. A combination of coming from a divorced home and Protestant influence—as well as being a teenager at the time, with a limited understanding of complex theological issues—led to my leaving the Catholic Church, in my heart, at age fifteen. I left officially at eighteen and was baptized into the Seventh-Day Adventist Church.

I won’t go into detail, but I wasn’t impressed by some things in the Catholic Church. The deacon who tried to convince me to stay Catholic said something like, “The Catholic Church is the one true church,” without offering much explanation or showing from the Bible that we are not obligated to observe the Sabbath of the Old Testament (Col. 2:16–17—I read this when I was twenty-six and then left the SDA church but remained Protestant). I think it is very easy to conclude that Catholicism is in error when one is not exposed to Catholic apolegetics and to truly God-fearing Catholics (as opposed to marginal, “cultural” Catholics).

God blessed me with the opportunity over the last few years to minister to a neighbor—an elderly widow, homebound and devoutly Catholic, who told me she constantly prayed for me and had such a love for God. Though I didn’t agree with saint veneration at the time, I was impressed by her devotion. (By the way, I read about saint veneration, feast days of saints, and relics in the account of the martyrdom of Polycarp. If the Church indeed became corrupt by adding things not mentioned in the Bible, such as the above, it did so two centuries before the legalization of Christianity, a concept I can’t accept.)

Nevertheless, I didn’t like the divisions within Protestantism. Nowadays Evangelicals call for Christian unity, citing Jesus’ prayer, but have yet to unite into one Protestant denomination. Over the last few years, James’ focus on justification by works convinced me, yet I was afraid to tell anyone for fear of being called “legalist.” Ironically, Protestantism is supposed to affirm the right of the individual to interpret the Bible and not be intimidated by an established church’s authority. But all Protestant denominations are authorities unto themselves, and, not withstanding sola scriptura, it is more accurate to say that a church believes in the Bible according to Luther, or Calvin, etc., than to say that any church believes in the Bible “alone.”

It is very interesting to see Protestants celebrate Christmas and Easter. Where does the Bible tell us to do this? This bothered me for years, but whom could I talk to? This practice contradicted the belief that all doctrines and practices are to be founded on the Bible alone. Also, Evangelicals now say, “According to tradition, Peter was crucified upside down.” Protestants aren’t supposed to believe in ancient tradition outside of the Bible!

Following is a portion of Pillar of Fire I downloaded: “Paul reminds us that the bread and the wine really become, by a miracle of God’s grace, the actual body and blood of Jesus: ‘Anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself’” (1 Cor. 11:27–29).

I also read verse 29 in the Amplified (Protestant) version: “For any one who eats and drinks without discriminating and recognizing with due appreciation that [it is Christ’s] body, eats and drinks a sentence—a verdict of judgment—upon himself.” This is very clear. The Eucharist was one of the biggest reasons for my return to the Church, not only because I didn’t want to sin as mentioned in verse 29 but also it gives new meaning to the text, “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col. 1:27).

I spoke at length to a priest on my spiritual journey and enrolled in the parish I grew up in. (I am now thirty-three.) This parish is studying the book of Romans on Monday nights. Catholic Bible study classes, at least here in New Jersey, were unheard of when I was growing up. It is great to see the Church is taking strides to be more meaningful to people like me.

I enrolled my name as a parishioner on Friday, made my confession to the priest on Saturday, and received Eucharist for the first time in many years this weekend. Sunday was the fiftieth anniversary of our parish—Church of Christ the King—and since it was the feast of Christ the King, it was an especially “high” Mass, with the bishop presiding.

I know that, as with any church, things don’t always go smoothly. But despite any difficulties I am a Catholic because of my loyalty to God. May I take a moment to ask for your support on an issue I’m dealing with? It’s the theory of evolution. It seems as though many Catholics accept evolution. From my Evangelical Protestant years, I came to reject (and still reject) the theory of evolution. I am wondering if a lot of priests believe in this and if there are any Catholics who share my belief in a literal view of Genesis 1–2 (creationism).

I reject evolution, not only because it goes against a literal view of Genesis1–2 and Exodus 20:11, but on other grounds:

Scientific. Louis Pasteur disproved the theory of spontaneous generation, yet evolution contradicts Pasteur’s findings, saying in effect that life came from non-life. (Evolution leaves no room for God, who is life). There is a Christian organization in California called the Creation Research Institute, made up of scientists who offer other scientific reasons for creationism.

Philosophical. “Survival of the fittest” seems contrary to our ethic of helping the poor, the handicapped, etc.

Ethical. Evolution reduces us to mere animals without souls, making it easier to justify abortion and euthanasia. Catholics rightly condemn these practices, so how could they support evolution?

Theological. If we are indeed evolving into something better, we don’t need a savior.

Racial. If we are not all derived from one man—Adam—then we are not really brothers and sisters. Apparently Darwin thought some races were superior.

I am happy to see the Catholic Church take strong stands in many areas rather than compromise. I don’t want to see compromise on this issue. I know the Church was wrong to condemn Galileo’s beliefs, but at the same time I hope she isn’t now trying to make up for this by blindly following whatever science says. Especially when scientists are constantly coming up with “new” theories that contradict “old” ones about the origins of life. 

Tom Gorman 
Manville, New Jersey 


 

Can’t We All Just Get Along?

 

I like your magazine, especially the articles by Fr. Ryland. I hope he resumes writing for you after he re-settles. But, please, refrain from intramural Catholic-bashing. It ruined the Wanderer and it’s ruining New Oxford Review. Although I agree with the authentic Catholic viewpoint entirely, we have enough problems with the secular world to waste time and energy attacking one another.

It’s quite possible we may be entering a period of anti-Catholic persecution in this country. We all have to stick together. 

Michael Johns 
Silver Spring, Maryland 


 

Simple: No Priest, No Eucharist

 

I thoroughly enjoyed the beautiful and edifying article by “Tarcisius” in your November issue (“Underground in Saudi Arabia”). However, one imprecise expression was used that is most problematic. That is, the author speaks of gathering a “Eucharistic assembly.” Presumably he means a Communion service. The formula is simple: no priest, no Eucharist. There is, of course, then no possibility of a “Eucharistic assembly.” 

For this very reason we heard so often during the Soviet years of groups of believers coming together in parish churches to pray, placing a stole on the altar as a reminder of the one who was absent from their midst, weeping and praying for the arrival of a priest — not a bad idea for a sadly increasing number of American parishes. 

Rev. Peter M.J. Stravinskas 
Mt. Pocono, Pennsylvania

Did you like this content? Please help keep us ad-free
Enjoying this content?  Please support our mission!Donatewww.catholic.com/support-us